Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FINE GAEL, AS you may well remember, once claimed that abolishing the Seanad would save the taxpayer around €20 million per year.
But figures show the cost of holding the referendum to abolish the upper house wasn’t far off that amount.
The Department of Public Expenditure confirmed to Fine Gael TD Alan Farrell that it cost €14.4 million to hold the referendums on the abolition of the Seanad and the Court of Appeal in October 2013.
The total cost for 11 referendums held since 2001 is €118.6 million.
Public Expenditure Minister Brendan Howlin set out the expenditure in an answer to a parliamentary question from Farrell:
June 2001:
Prohibition of Death Penalty, International Criminal Court, Treaty of Nice
Cost €11.1 million
March 2002:
Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy
€10.8 million
October 2002:
Treaty of Nice
€15 million
June 2004:
Citizenship
No figure available
June 2008:
Treaty of Lisbon
€22.2m
October 2009:
Treaty of Lisbon
€17.5m
October 2011:
Houses of Oireachtas Enquiries
Judges Remuneration
No figure available
May 2012:
Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union
€14.8 million
November 2012:
Children
€12.8 million
October 2013:
Abolition of Seanad
Court of Appeal
€14.4m
Regarding the unavailability of figures for the 2004 and 2011 votes, Howlin explains:
“The referenda in those years were not taken on their own but were combined and accounted for with European and Local Elections in 2004 and with a Presidential and bye-election in 2011.
“It is not, therefore, possible to give an accurate cost of the referenda as there would have been an extensive sharing of staff and facilities for the different polls taken.”
The referendums on same sex marriage and the qualifying age for the presidency this May will cost around €15 million, according to Howlin.
The costs include paying for polling station and count centre staff, and the distribution of explanatory information from the Referendum Commission.
So what? NOT having a referendum on the banking debt has cost the state how much now?
The swiss have the right idea. Referenda a couple of times a year on a myriad of matters. Proper citizen led decision making. A far more democratic way of doing things than the joke we have to tolerate.
You can’t put a price on democracy.
Now Jammin I can’t figure out if you’re trying to wind everyone up or not. This time.
So I’m giving you benefit of doubt and a thumbs up.
Well for a start the Lisbon Treaty Referendum should have only been held once…that was FF just looking for the right answer.
Most of the referendum have been a complete waste of time and money, especially the EU where you keep voting until it is a yes result.
The constitutional convention voted in favour of Direct democracy ,the government ignored it because the thought of the people being able to challenge them or recall them from office scares the crap out of them .
“You can’t put a price on democracy”
Sure you can’t.
€31.5 million on two re-run referendum, that’s the penalty for disobeying the EU and their contempt for the democratic wishes of a sovereign state.
The sovereign state of Ireland democratically ratified both Treaties in referendums.
How the fcuk does it cost this much? Who is making money out of it?
Hello.
A referendum on our water system first would have saved us over a billion euro.
And look what we got for it.
E.U. Plutocracy…
They could include a vote on choice with the referendum in may and save €15 million.
Choice of what?
Does the Journal wish that it was spent on IW? The constitution must be respected even if that means the people have a voice/ How much has bad government cost Ireland since 2001? I perish at the thought!
I’ve forgotten how many of those referendum were held twice. We gave the wrong answer. So much for democracy.
On the contrary that is democracy.
People in democracies change their minds all the time. Otherwise why have elections at all when the result of the last one would do?
The French have a two vote election in which people vote differently.
That is because the second round has only two contenders, so people cannot vote for their first preference as in the earlier round.
What on earth are you taking about cmac?
In the case that no single candidate scores more than 50%, then the French hold a runoff vote between the two highest-scoring candidates.
This is to avoid vote-splitting and ensures that the winner has the support of more than half the voting public.
Honestly, reading people’s comments here on voting and economics is enough to drive somebody to drink.
Tony Leary
The majority of people changed their mind long ago regarding who they wish to legislate on behalf of them, mostly due to the fact that those elected bare faced lied to get into power, where is their chance to vote again?
The government have been essentially taking the people’s money in order to take apart the people’s Constitution (the Constitution is what protects the people from the tyranny of the state and its politicians).
The only way that the people can help to put an end to the politicians’ fetish for constitutional vandalism is by continuing to vote down referendums which seek to undercut and compromise the integrity of Bunreacht na hEireann, and by voting out politicians who propose them.
You’re right, it’s the peoples constitution, but some people want it to change.
It’s an outdated document and needs to be updated to reflect Irish society better.
The plural of referendum is referenda.
Jake you are right but your inference is wrong. The plural of referendum is either referenda or referendums.
Also, stadium- stadia or stadiums.
What you generally find is those secure in their comprehension of the English language will use referendums while those looking to sound clever use referenda.
It is referenda in every fora. Not everyone is willing to accept the dumbing down of the English language.
Not in the forums I’ve been following.
I’m actually correct in what I say. Check it out.
Don’t forget, two of them were undemocratic EU (you didn’t vote the way we wanted you to vote) reruns. Where both FF and FG scared the voted into voting yes because “It would look bad for Ireland in Europe.
Nothing undemocratic about the people changing their minds in a subsequent referendum!
CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND
“In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,
We, the people of Éire, Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ”
This crap has to be removed regardless of cost.
This commentary on the cost of referendums is hypocritical from a media that is always mouthing off about ‘reform’.
Any reform that involves changing the constitution needs a referendum.
Talking about the Seanad referendum is particularly hypocritical.
The saving if that insider elite talking shop for the cronies of the media would be 20 million per annum ad infinitum.
The cost of the referendum was a once off.
I would prefer direct democracy. It would mean that a Dillusional political cult can be avoided.
The Irish Constitution is a rag bag of words that were put together in a different time to suit a different set of circumstances. We shouldn’t need referendums to change words, thats what we elect governments for.
A rag bag indeed! put together by a bunch of pious old men, for a bunch of pious old men and scrutinised by the bishop of Dublin to make sure it gave the catholic church domain over social, health and education policy, to be used and abused by said church and it’s tyrants with no oversight and boy have they abused it to to the max!. Nothing has changed, the country is still being run from the shadows by the Roman cult and it’s quisling politicians in Ireland. The Irish constitution is not fit for purpose and should be re-written from scratch to take account that it is 2015 and not 1915! Any mention of religion or a deity should be removed and politicians should be made to do their jobs, we don’t need to keep having referenda on things, what’s the point of electing a government if they don’t govern? Mind you that’s what they’ve done since we swapped British rule for Rome rule anyway, lack of government is why Ireland is such a basket case when it comes to abortion, political and banking scandals. Ireland needs a 21st century constitution and less referenda.
In theory, a referendum is not need to extend marriage to same-sex couples, but the Constitution is ambiguous on this point, and given the way it’s been interpreted by the courts in the past, you run the risk of the Supreme Court possibly ruling same-sex marriages unconstitutional either after a bill has been passed, or even worse, after people have actually gotten married. Better to be safe than sorry. I don’t see this as a political campaign, except in the minds of the Labour old guard. They won’t get much credit if it passes, and both parties will lose a lot of credibility if it doesn’t.
Both the current and previous AGs say that a referendum is needed.
Do they?
And they did this after opposing Zappone and Gilligan who sought recognition of their Canadian Marriage?
Last weeks AGs advice will not be published, yet we can be certain that two AGs have said a referendum is needed?
Slow news day? Why is the word whopping in the title? And eh, how much do people think a referendum will cost? 12 million ain’t that much.
I’m thrilled with the protection our constitution gives us from fashion, and from our politicians.
I voted NO to it at the time.
And we are going to have two more referendums! I have been informing myself on the Marriage referendum and it seems a referendum is not even needed to change the law to extend the definition of marriage so what’s the point in having a referendum. Even reading the wording all the government are doing is giving themselves explicit power to legislate for something that they already have the implicit power to legislate for as they are not barred from acting. The only reason I can think of is that if it passes then we can all congratulate ourselves on how great we are and if it does not then FG can tell Labour, well the people did not want it so why bother legislating for it. On lowering the Presidential age limit why bother does anyone honestly see someone under 35 running for this office although on second thoughts a contest between Simon Harris and Paul Murphy would be juicy!
That’s ludicrous-the entire public democratic system needs reforming immediately to reduce waste and unnecessary fees.
Those with no vote in our affairs i.e. those from the uk part of this island, seem to have a great interest in our concerns, why? baffling, do you think the irish people care what band of bigots is elected in stormont in the pretend government? why are they so obsessed in our affairs? very plastic paddy esque
it is fantastic that we the public get so much say in our affairs. long live democracy :)
have your say